Is Global Order Shifting? Ukraine, ME, Asia, Europe

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Hello, and welcome to this week Explained your essential download
on the global stories making headlines, we're ready to unpack.
He had another complex week from around the globe. But
before we dive in, just a quick reminder everybody, if
you want to get each new episode automatically, make sure
you're following or subscribed wherever you're listening right now. It's
the easiest way to stay updated. And hey, if you're

(00:27):
enjoying the show and want to help others discover it,
leaving a quick rating review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify
really makes a difference and we really appreciate it. We
also want to give a massive shout out to our
sponsor for this episode, Fresh Orsted Coffee. Seriously, they're the
reason we can keep bringing you to the show every week.
If you're a coffee lover like us and appreciate seriously fresh,

(00:48):
high quality beans, you've got to check them out. They
have a fantastic selection. Plus they've got a special deal
just for our listeners. You can get twenty percent off
your first order by using the code this week that's
tchis w e e K. When you check out, just
make sure to use the link in our show notes
to grab that offer trust us. It's some of the

(01:08):
best coffee around. Finally, remember that This Week Explained is
part of the awesome Leon Media network. You can discover
more great podcasts over at leonmedianetwork dot com. All right,
let's get into what you guys are here for. Which
are the stories that are shaping our world. This week,
we're breaking down the latest on the wars in Ukraine

(01:29):
and the Middle East, India, Pakistan ceasefire, and contested elections
in Europe. Let's dive right into the latest developments in
the war in Ukraine. It feels like the kind of
news that could actually change things, or at least change
the conversation a little bit. And when you're talking about
a conflict of this magnitude, any shift in rhetoric from

(01:50):
a major player like the US is worth a close look.
President Trump, after a call with President Zelensky, posted on
truth Social because of course he did. He can't do
anything without posting on his social media platform. He puts
on True Social and said that the US would impose
sanctions on Russia if it didn't accept an extended ceasefire.

(02:11):
This was late on Thursday.

Speaker 2 (02:15):
Yeah, it was a few days ago. Last week yeah, last.

Speaker 1 (02:19):
Week, Sokeravin, what is your read on this. It feels
like a bit of a pivot, especially considering some of
the administration's earlier positions.

Speaker 2 (02:27):
Yeah, it is a pivot. I'd say it's a notable pivot.
Everybody talks about or putin puppets and Russia Gate and
all this kind of stuff, and here we have Donald
Trump is going out there and he's trying to be
very firm with the Russian president. Now, now, remember earlier

(02:47):
this year we did see this administration make certain concessions
to Russia. They broadened diplomatic relations between the US and Russia.
They even I don't even know, It felt like twenty
years ago they voted against the UN resolution condemning Moscow
for the war in Ukraine. It seems so long ago.

(03:09):
So this tougher line, linking new sanctions directly to Russia
accepting a thirty day truce for negotiations is more of
an assertive stance, and it's more aligned with Ukraine's immediate goals.

Speaker 1 (03:21):
Ukraine did welcome in almost immediately, didn't they. I mean,
Zelenski said they were ready to have a full ceasefire
right now. But Russia has always seemed to win different
things before agreeing to a pause.

Speaker 2 (03:35):
Yeah, back in March they had those talks in Saudi Arabia.
The Trump administration did propose a thirty day truce, and
Ukraine was on board. They wanted an end to the conflict,
but it was Russia in Russia's position has consistently been
to negotiate the terms of a settlement before any ceasefire happens. Now,

(03:56):
Trump had threatened sanctions before if Russia walked away from talks,
but this particular social media post, I think it's the
clearest link yet between new US sanctions and a specific
thirty day truce. Trump even said the US quote calls
for ideally, So it's got to put in a little
caveat there. Ideally ideally a thirty day unconditional ceasefire.

Speaker 1 (04:20):
End quote. And this callwoods Lensky. It wasn't just about
the war, was it. They were marking the anniversary of
the end World War Two in Europe, which was May eighth.

Speaker 2 (04:30):
Yeah, that's exactly right. And this also happened right at
the same time as Russia was celebrating their own victories.

Speaker 1 (04:38):
Yeah, guys, remember we were on the same side once.

Speaker 2 (04:40):
Yeah, that was. I mean, we can't even get into
the the history of what happened, talk about how the
UK tried to invade Russia as they're fighting Germany to
take down the Stalin led communists right with it? Yes,
crazy historical kind of how I don't know. Alliance is

(05:06):
meander through the ether in history. It's it's wild.

Speaker 1 (05:11):
Now.

Speaker 2 (05:12):
Zelenski's office did put out a statement. They said Trump
confirmed he wants to see the war ended and that
Trump is ready to help, and it's all part of
this complex signaling that's happening there. We even had Vice
President jd Vance chime in. Usually that seems to be
on a negative spin on things, but Jade Vance suggested

(05:34):
that if the US pulls out of talks, the blame's
going to fall directly on Russia for not negotiating in
good faith.

Speaker 1 (05:41):
So all around it's strong. It's a stronger diplomatic push,
which I'm sure made Zelensky breathe a sigh of relief
a little b actually after that Earth minerals deal it.

Speaker 2 (05:52):
You know.

Speaker 1 (05:52):
So, but while all of these high level talks and
threats are happening, you have been digging into what Russia
is actually doing on the ground in the territories that
it occupies. And frankly, some of the information we've looked
at this week is deeply disturbing. It paints a picture
far removed from ceasefire negotiations.

Speaker 2 (06:13):
Yeah, it really does. And a lot of this comes
from the Institute for the Study of War. They did
an entire breakdown of what was happening. So while the
world focuses on potential peace talks, Russia is actively working
to solidify its control and fundamentally change the fabric of
the occupied regions in Ukraine.

Speaker 1 (06:33):
All right, well, let's start with the property situation. We're
talking about people's homes and their land that's belonged to
the same families for generations.

Speaker 2 (06:43):
And this is systematic and it's happening on a massive scale.
The Kremlin recently claimed that they have inventoried over a
quarter of a million real estate objects in occupied Ukraine,
which they call Russian land, and they enter them into
the Russian State redel. Now they frame this as quote,
protecting property rights in quote and allowing Russia to value

(07:07):
to put evaluation on the real estate.

Speaker 1 (07:10):
But obviously Ukraine official Ukrainian officials are calling it something else. Looting.

Speaker 2 (07:16):
Yeah, that's that's quite the term for it.

Speaker 1 (07:19):
Pillaging.

Speaker 2 (07:19):
Pillaging, that's an old world term.

Speaker 1 (07:23):
Them bikings.

Speaker 2 (07:25):
Now, the Meropaul Mayer advisor or mayoral advisor put out
a pretty blunt statement said, Russia is planning to nationalize
these inventoried properties. And this nationalization that they speak of
essentially allows Russia to seize Ukrainian property, auction it off
most likely to Russian citizens, and facilitate the illegal relocation

(07:49):
of Russians into these occupied areas. Those Russians can then vote,
they can continue to annex more and more of Ukraine.
And this is what so you're looking at this we
go broader scale, this is what Putin to do on
a broader scale within Ukraine.

Speaker 1 (08:03):
Have the Russian population seep into Ukraine bit by bit yep.

Speaker 2 (08:07):
And then as he always says, well there they've always
been Russian and they think of themselves as Russian. Well,
when you put Russian people into that land, that becomes
true and becomes a factual statement. So yeah, I think
I do believe, you know, opinion wise, that what we
are seeing is robbery. I mean, these these lands are

(08:28):
not internationally recognized and they're being taken, and they're occupied by.

Speaker 1 (08:33):
Russia, internationally recognized as Russian territory.

Speaker 2 (08:36):
Right, they are internationally recognized as Ukrainian territory even now,
even though Russia voted and did that, Russia voted, did
that fake voting at gunpoint? Yeah, So, so it's robbery
and and I think what we're also seeing here and
what we just talked about, is this sort of demographic
engineering all rolled into what's going on, and it.

Speaker 1 (09:01):
Doesn't stop there, right, Like the tactics involving children are
those are particularly chilling. I have seen how Russia might
be using children's summer camps in Crimea as human shields.

Speaker 2 (09:15):
Yeah, yeah, so this is a deeply concerning possibility. Now,
it's always deeply concerning when children are involved. Right now,
Russia continues to promote occupied Crimea as a tourist destination.
It is one of Russia's biggest tourist destinations. They're planning
hundreds of these summer camps that you talked about for

(09:37):
both Russian and Ukrainian children, including orphans and children of
Russian soldiers. All this while Crimea is a critical military
hub for Russia, it's also a legitimate target for Ukrainian forces.
So you're seeing these vacations and parties and children's summer
camps amidst bombings and military fighting on the ground. This

(09:58):
is certainly putting children directly in harm's way.

Speaker 1 (10:02):
But I mean, if their parents know that it's a
dangerous area, why would they send their kids there?

Speaker 2 (10:08):
So now that's where we get back to a lot
of the kids are orphans or their their children of
soldiers who are fighting battle. The parents don't have much
say in this. Oh, the children are sent just like you,
you know, we have Well.

Speaker 1 (10:21):
What do you mean by using them as human shilds?
Do you mean like a buffer between right?

Speaker 2 (10:25):
So putting it putting them out there in the mid
in the midst of a battle right alongside, oh, you know,
a naval base. So Ukraine just goes to strike a
naval base, shrapnel flies, their children in the area, just
trying to have fun.

Speaker 1 (10:41):
So is it kind of like they're hoping Ukraine will
fire on that area and then they could say, look
what they've done, they're killing our children twofold? Right?

Speaker 2 (10:50):
Want it? Protect?

Speaker 1 (10:51):
It?

Speaker 2 (10:51):
Could protect the area from bombing?

Speaker 1 (10:53):
Yea, if they decide to stay away from.

Speaker 2 (10:55):
Right and the other thing is definitely an international crisis
that could you know, move some support away from Ukraine, right,
just like we're seeing with Israel, which we'll get into
obviously in a few minutes.

Speaker 1 (11:09):
Well, it seems like cultural erasure on a massive scale, honestly,
since they're China, Yeah, just kind of absorb Ukraine and
into Russia. And amidst all of this, the property theft,
the militarization of children, what about the basic necessities there?
Are they even able to provide for the people they're

(11:30):
living in the area. I mean I remember reading something
about a critical shortage of doctors.

Speaker 2 (11:35):
Yeah, you're right, and they're struggling massively. And this is
both sides. We're not talking just Ukraine here. Russia is
struggling massively. The Russian Ministry of Health even published a
draft bill that would essentially force medical school graduates to
work for three years in the occupied territories of Ukraine
or they would face huge fines. So are what are

(11:56):
students going to do? They're going to go not pay
the fine be a doctor in those areas. Now, some
Ukrainian sources believe that some will be compelled to go
under threat of mobilization into the Russian Army. So even
the finds if that doesn't work, they're gonna say, okay,
well now you're a Russian army doctor. You have no

(12:16):
choice now. Now, the Luhansk oh Blost administration called this
shortage catastrophic and just to give you an idea, so
that was Luhansk now unoccupied Harsan. They've only filled about
forty percent of the needed doctor positions. That is just
devastating to think of how many people need medical support

(12:39):
in that region and the doctors yeah position. And so
what they're doing is that they're trying things like overhauling
medical colleges and building housing to attract the personnel to
work there. But programs like one which the Zimski Doctor
that aims to relocate Russian doctor it also serves the

(13:01):
dual purpose of repopulating areas with those Russian citizens. And
now so now you have high, higher class Russian citizens
in these areas, and it's a recipe for just a terrible,
terrible humanitarian crisis.

Speaker 1 (13:18):
So on one hand, we have this diplomatic dance around
a potential ceasefire and sanctions, a glimmer of something that
could ease the fighting. But on the other there's this
relentless campaign by Russia within the territories that it controls
within Ukraine, seizing property, manipulating and militarizing children, and failing
to provide basic services. It's definitely a grim reality check.

Speaker 2 (13:43):
Yeah, it is now. I will say the high level
political maneuvering is just one layer of this, but what's
happening on the ground in Ukraine demonstrates Russia's long term
strategic objectives. They're not just trying to hold territory, They're
trying to fundamentally remake it in their own image. That's
the context for any ceasefire talk. I think it's not

(14:06):
just about stopping the shooting. Peace is one thing, but
when you just let a bully take over, that allows
for more bullying, and it's I think what all this is,
It's about what happens to the people there and the
land that's caught in the middle of all this.

Speaker 1 (14:26):
Well, as we wait for more from the ceasefire negotiations,
it's time to shift our focus to the news that's
coming out of the Middle East this past week, and
I tell you it has been intense.

Speaker 2 (14:37):
To put it.

Speaker 1 (14:38):
Mildly, we're looking at a situation where Israel has apparently
set President Trump's visit to the region this week as
a hard deadline for a hostage and Seaspire deal with Hamas.

Speaker 2 (14:50):
Yeah, you're absolutely right, and that visit is slated for
this week May thirteenth to the sixteenth. So we're just
we're talking just a few days, right, the sixteenth, today's
to day's the thirteenth, and the sixteenth is three days saentury.

Speaker 1 (15:04):
Yeah, guys, we are recording this later. We'll explain at
the end of the podcast.

Speaker 2 (15:09):
We're not gonna get that right now. We're going to focus.
We were focus on the news.

Speaker 1 (15:13):
Now we owe you guys some focus.

Speaker 2 (15:15):
Yeah, an explanation, but focus first.

Speaker 1 (15:17):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (15:19):
But so what's happening here is that the Israeli security cabinet,
according to multiple reports and even one Israeli defensive official,
has already approved plans for a massive offensive if no
deal is reached, and they are calling that massive offensive
operation Gideon's Chariot Chariots.

Speaker 1 (15:39):
Cool, fancy, Yeah, it's a fancy name, Gideon's Chariots. Even
the name sounds ominous.

Speaker 2 (15:46):
It's biblical.

Speaker 1 (15:47):
So oh okay, Well, so what exactly does this operation entail?
From what I've read it's not just another incursion.

Speaker 2 (15:58):
No, Look, this is orders of magnitude different than the
other incursions, at least in its stated intent. Now, the
plan reportedly involves the Israeli military moving to seize the
entire Gaza Strip. I'm sure everyone's heard there, We have
it right there. Real reason. For years, the talk was

(16:19):
that Israel wanted to do this just to take control
of the entire Gaza Strip, and they're going to find
a way to do that. And here's the plan to
do it. Get in chariots, we are what we're talking
about here are either four or five armored in infantry divisions.
And the objective, the Israeli say is the complete defeat

(16:42):
of Hamas, destroying its military, destroying its governmental capabilities. And
of course they want the release of all remaining hostages.
It is believed they're about fifty nine hostages. Now what
I think last check it was less than thirty who
were still alive, right, I think we're getting less and
less now of those. I'm sure you saw the American

(17:06):
that was released. That was and I don't know if
we'll get into it today. That's probably another episode that
we'll get into. But the Net and Yahoo Trump friendship
maybe no longer. You know. Over the last few days,
some actions by Trump have been severely anti at least
Benjamin Net Yahoo.

Speaker 1 (17:28):
Hey, so Trump can be surprising sometimes. Yeah, you know,
seize the entire strip. Okay, it is obviously their number
one priority with Gideon's charity.

Speaker 2 (17:39):
Charriot said, charity, Gideon's chariot.

Speaker 1 (17:43):
They're not being charoball.

Speaker 2 (17:44):
No, And I was having a tough one with with
that too, trying to say that it's not even a
tongue twister.

Speaker 1 (17:49):
No, it's not. But also I'm a little rusty. It
only takes it only takes two weeks from for toware
off the the articles. Okay, what what's okay? So what
is going to happen after they seize the entire Gaza strip?
I mean the articles mention Israel staying for a quote

(18:12):
unspecified amount of time end quote, potentially reoccupying it, you know, indefinitely,
since there's obviously no timeline, and they say, oh.

Speaker 2 (18:22):
It's for our safety, it's a buffer zone. Yeah, forget about.

Speaker 1 (18:26):
The Palestinians needing a place to live. We need to
focus on our safety. But that's obviously a huge shift
from the two thousand and five withdraw from the Gaza strip.

Speaker 2 (18:38):
Yeah, it's it's a huge ship. This it's a really
complex picture that's framed here. So you've got the surrounding
countries from that surround Israel that are saying Israel's occupation
is illegal, not to mention, the UN says it's illegal,
and most of the international most international players. But then,

(19:00):
as always, let's look at it from Israel's point of view.
Many within Israel field, that especially the conservative of the
hardline right winging part of Israeli's government and civilians, say
that that pulling out in two thousand and five was
frankly a fundamental mistake. So what's the plan now? While

(19:23):
the official word from the IDF is that they intend
to remain in any conquered territory, and so what's the
goal to prevent any resurgence of terror or even using
the term for it, the RAFA model, Remember, but what
was the social media thing? All eyes on RAFA? So

(19:44):
that was that was something that the international community didn't
like so much what they did there. Yeah, and so
what this means is essentially neutralizing threats and turning these
cleared areas into security zones, those permanent buffer zones under
Israeli control. Let's be clear, this does or this could

(20:08):
mean flattening whatever structures are left after months of intense conflict.

Speaker 1 (20:14):
So they're just openly calling it the re model, knowing
that Rafa is what kind of.

Speaker 2 (20:20):
Made they're not calling it that. That's what people have
read the operation.

Speaker 1 (20:25):
I thought you were saying Israel was calling yet and
I was like, why would they call it that? Whenever
That's when people started kind of second guessing their stance
on the conflict. Not necessarily, you know, obviously what happened
in October terrible, horrible, shouldn't have happened. But then you
know everything that happened after.

Speaker 2 (20:46):
That, right we go with the chicken or the egg, right,
which you know it's a paradox.

Speaker 1 (20:51):
I just thought they were calling it that openly, like
kind of mocking like the international community for you know,
not agreeing with the way they were handling it. Yeah,
that's what I thought that, That's what I thought you
were saying.

Speaker 3 (21:04):
I was like, wow, the balls on the rail and
and I mean, look all eyes on Rafa and they
talked about and everybody was up in arms about it,
but that was an Israeli victory, they were able to
get hostages that were there that Hamas said, well, nothing's

(21:25):
in rafah rafas just a civilian zone.

Speaker 2 (21:27):
And they found tunnels and they found all kinds of stuff.

Speaker 1 (21:30):
But it was at the expense of thousands.

Speaker 2 (21:32):
Oh yes, at the expense of thousands of people. And
then so it's who do you blame for that? And
on this podcast we like to blame both sides for
why is war? Why is why is are we.

Speaker 1 (21:43):
Allowed to war?

Speaker 2 (21:44):
Hashtag Bill Burr washing?

Speaker 1 (21:47):
Is this legal? So the people, the people that are
still there trying to piece together the lives that they
you know that's obviously been shattered by this entire conflict.
We're talking about nearly two million Palestinians. What the heck
happens to them under this plan?

Speaker 2 (22:09):
Right? Yeah, So I think it's a it's a good
time to unpack what could happen to them?

Speaker 1 (22:14):
And this is just speculation or this is what they
is Israel saying, this is what they plan on during
with the Palestini.

Speaker 2 (22:20):
This is according to the document scene on the operation, okay,
that would happen. And what we're looking at here is
a plan that calls for the widespread displacement of all
those people two million, nearly two million Palestinians, So nearly
two thousand people. Not a small move, right.

Speaker 1 (22:43):
Two million you said two thousand.

Speaker 2 (22:44):
Oh yeah, two thousand million, nearly nearly two million. I
wish I had the exact number, but I don't think
anyone has the exact number of the amount of people.
It could be over two million people, but that's still
a lot. So looking at most likely a forcible relocation
to a specific humanitarian zone that would be in the

(23:06):
southern part of Gaza.

Speaker 1 (23:08):
Where they would withhold more.

Speaker 2 (23:11):
Aid. Now, this goes back to and we probably won't
discuss it now because it's just happening right now, go
back to the relationship between Trump and net and Yahoo.
President Trump has removed sanctions from Syria. So that's a
negative one for the Israelis. So US is becoming more

(23:32):
pro Syria, which is a country that we talked about
that's now led by a former terrorists, yeah, who says
he's resolved all those terrorists. Yeah, capabilities, he's not a terrorist.
He's a fun loving guy. Now, and then you have
Donald Trump saying that he will require US humanitarian aid

(23:53):
into those parts of Gaza. For the people because the
at least and Yahoo said they're not going to let
the aid come through until Hamas is dismantled.

Speaker 1 (24:05):
That is crazy.

Speaker 2 (24:06):
Well, they say if aid comes through.

Speaker 1 (24:09):
There, I know what his reasoning is. But the fact
that he's like, I know what's going to happen. I
know people are going to die. I know people are
going to suffer. I know that, and I don't care
because I'm just worried about my bottom line.

Speaker 2 (24:21):
Right, and so yeah, that's just having.

Speaker 1 (24:25):
No compassion or empathy for those people whatsoever. Is just
it blows my mind.

Speaker 2 (24:31):
But there is a rationality for Israel for this, and
it's too old.

Speaker 1 (24:36):
I'm gonna say that it's rational.

Speaker 2 (24:38):
Well, I know, I know that they're.

Speaker 1 (24:40):
Worried about their safety and I know they have suffered
a lot.

Speaker 2 (24:44):
Well, I'm not saying that they're being rational, but they
have a rat But they say they would say they
have a rationale for it, and it's one to separate
the civilian population from the Hamas fighters so that way
they can bomb and destroy everything and kill no more civilian.

Speaker 1 (25:03):
They haven't accomplished that yet. They haven't separated Hamas from
the civilian population.

Speaker 2 (25:10):
So you have to understand this plan.

Speaker 1 (25:12):
Boy, do not talked about it.

Speaker 2 (25:14):
I'm not trying. I'm not trying to be I really
am not trying to be condescending or all right, I'm
listening listening. I just you know me, I try to
get my points out because then I'll forget it. Yeah,
and then it's a go for it. Just jumbled mess
of a point.

Speaker 1 (25:28):
And now you're not getting to your point.

Speaker 2 (25:29):
Yes, but so what was my point again?

Speaker 1 (25:34):
No? Uh, they have her, they rationalize this, right, they
want to separate.

Speaker 2 (25:43):
So the operation is getting chariots now, right, Okay, this
operation is the last ditch effort. Right, So, like you said,
well they didn't try to move all these people and
start bombing from the very beginning. Well that's because it
was the very beginning. So Israel is seeing Hamas not

(26:03):
agreeing to release all the hostages, and they're at a
point where Net and Yahoo has to get back all
the hostages or the Israeli people are going to vote
to kick him out, and so he needs to do this.

Speaker 1 (26:17):
It might happen then.

Speaker 2 (26:18):
Oh yeah, it's gonna happen anyway, and he's not going
to live forever, and no one's going to live forever.
So a lot of these conversations are moot points about
leaders that are you know, authoritarian.

Speaker 1 (26:29):
Trying to cement their legacies or everything else.

Speaker 2 (26:34):
So this is just the last ditch effort. I mean
that what I'm saying there is removing two million people
from an area is almost impossible, and the only reason
to do it is when all other solutions failed. And
so that's where Israel thinks they're at right now. All
solutions have failed, and here they are. Now that's the

(26:56):
one thing they're removing everybody to give the IDF more
room to maneuver. The second thing that they rap that
is in their rationale is Israel contends that this is
the only strategy that can prevent the tragic killing of
civilians who are caught in the ceasefire or in the

(27:16):
crossfire as human shields. And the reason they didn't do
it before was what I talked to you about. There
was just no way to do it early on in
the war. They're gonna try to do it now. But
as you can imagine, and just like you heard in here,
we tried a twenty second talk about this plan and

(27:39):
it's turned into a thirty minute talk about what's going
on a plan like this raises a ton of questions
and it gets a ton of opposition, even on this podcast.

Speaker 1 (27:50):
But where do they plan on putting two million Palestinians? Yeah,
I mean, I honestly don't care how Israel tries to
spend this single humanitarian area wherever that may be, for
two million people, Like, how do you know what the
size of it is? Like?

Speaker 2 (28:09):
The what? I don't would it? I mean, when you're
anytime you're talking about two humanitarian camps, we're not talking
about luxury five star resorts, right, We're not talking about
a one star. Yeah, we're not talking about a Best
Western or we're.

Speaker 1 (28:27):
Talking about a tarp and a can of beans.

Speaker 2 (28:29):
Maybe, yeah, you know. And so how big would it
be enough to fit two million people uncomfortably? Yeah, on
top of each other? Probably? I mean go back to
Hurricane Katrina, right the Superdome. That was that space big
enough to fit all the people that they put in there?
Absolutely not? Yeah, but they had to do it. That's

(28:50):
a different case. They had to do that. There was
no choice there. But when we're talking about these humanitarian
areas a lot of times, most times it's not the best.

Speaker 1 (29:03):
Well, Okay, So there was also mention of Palestine's leaving
Gaza voluntarily for other countries. I guess, you know, re
settling them in neighboring countries, and that obviously aligns with
President Trump's vision for Gaza. Trump got Trump Plaza Gaza.

Speaker 2 (29:25):
Yeah, hey, hey, no, I don't know.

Speaker 1 (29:29):
I don't like hel Well that rolled off my tongue. Okay,
So how realistic is that? Do you think these other
countries will be willing to accept these refugees?

Speaker 2 (29:39):
I think voluntary is doing a lot of heavy lifting
in that sentence. Deianna, that's what I think.

Speaker 1 (29:44):
You didn't want to go home, like any person, they
want to go home to their home.

Speaker 2 (29:48):
You you remove anybody from their homeland. But that's war,
war as hell, right, or as they say in the
show Mash for our old crowd, hell as hell, and
war is war, and war is horrible and terrible.

Speaker 1 (30:05):
So they said horrible and terrible.

Speaker 2 (30:08):
No, but war quote writing the script, that's what I
would say. Hell was fine and war is horrible and terrible.
I no, that's uh so can they You asked how
realistic it is to quote voluntarily, force voluntarily and then
force people? Right, It's just hard for me to see

(30:32):
how departures under that much duress could be considered voluntary.
I don't think it is. And then critically, as of now,
no country has even agreed to accept the displaced Palestinians.
And that's despite you know, Israeli officials are going negotiations
are ongoing right now with the other countries. They're not

(30:53):
Egypt and Jordan. Those are the two countries that are
going to get forced to bring these people in. They
at some point, most likely they're going to be forced
to take in the Palestinians. They don't want to for
tons of reasons. I know people will say, well that
because Palestinians are one way or another in Egypt and
Jordan don't want them two million people. Do you know

(31:15):
what that does to an economy when you're forced to
take in two million refugees and.

Speaker 1 (31:21):
You don't have all the resources necessary to support them.

Speaker 2 (31:24):
You barely have the resources to support your own people, right,
and now you're forced to do this to find accommodation.
But if it's in the US, two million people, We've
had this talk about the border. Two million people crossing
the border. That's devastating to everything. The medical system, all
of that. If you're going to force that on these countries,

(31:47):
you can see why they're not going to like Israel
as a country that borders them, right, they're going to
force to do this. So Israel, right here, I say,
is doing themselves no favors and attempting to do this.

Speaker 1 (32:00):
Now.

Speaker 2 (32:00):
The international community, including some of Israel's own allies, have
already condemned this voluntary immigration idea, and they also have
rights groups warning this could be once again another war
crime committed by Benjamin Niniauo.

Speaker 1 (32:18):
Is he not worried that by the end of this contract, I.

Speaker 2 (32:20):
Want to let you finish that.

Speaker 1 (32:21):
Absolutely not heed, Okay, I was just okay.

Speaker 2 (32:25):
It's putin worried. No, I'm not saying they're on the
same lines. Yeah, but no, no, don't not worry.

Speaker 1 (32:32):
No, you don't think they'll ever have to face the
consequences of their actions.

Speaker 2 (32:35):
Absolutely not now, Not on the international scene. Within his
own country, yeah, could be very much, could be, okay,
But I don't think he's worried about that, in like
worried for his own life or his own safety. I
think he's got enough money and enough family built up

(32:55):
within the government that he feels he'd be safe.

Speaker 1 (32:58):
Huh wow. Yeah, well to feel that safe and that
entitled that entitled to kill millions of people. Wow, and
just be like I'm not gonna get intro over this.
That's fine. I mean they might wrap my hands. Yeah,
be like, oh you bad boy, you shouldn't have done this.

Speaker 2 (33:16):
Then happen another movie in Glorious Bastards. I've been chewed out,
but I won't be killed. Oh yeah. When Brad Pitts,
he's like, oh, they're gonna kill you, and he's like,
now I'm gonna get chewed out. I've been chewed out. Okay.

Speaker 1 (33:34):
So if this massive operation goes ahead, what is the
plan for the humanitarian aid? I mean, I mean they
need it. They need it now. The situation is already dire,
and there are reports of foodstocks running out due to
the existing blockade since the last ceasefire broke down months ago.

Speaker 2 (33:56):
Yeah, I'll bring it back to what we talked about
with Trump and and Yahoo. Now, the Israeli defense has said,
and they've been quite clear, the current blockade on humanitarian
aid is going to continue during this initial phase and
only after the start of that operation and then the
broad evacuation of the population to the south. Would a

(34:17):
new humanitarian plan be implemented. Now, this plan involves delineating
an area in Rapha secured by the IDEF where civilian companies,
these private US companies who want to make billions of
dollars off of war are suffering. Should I take that
part out? No, I mean that's exactly that's exactly what

(34:38):
they're trying to do. Yes, it's not a humanitarian thing
by a lot of these companies. But so these private
US contract companies would come in get all the humanitarian
aid and they would hand out the aid. That way,
Israel can trust who's accepting the aids, all the.

Speaker 1 (35:00):
US companies that are supplying the age.

Speaker 2 (35:02):
So if you are a defense contractor for the United States,
you have to be vetted extremely Now I will talk
crap about defense contractors and how much I don't like
a lot of the big companies, but they are vetted
extremely carefully and intensely for everything that they do. Now,
do they still make mistakes, Yes, absolutely, We're all human

(35:25):
human We're all gonna make mistakes, but that all gets
vetted out. And the thinking here is that Israel can
trust those US companies just as the US trust Israeli companies.
We have an Israeli drone company that's right down the
house from us.

Speaker 1 (35:40):
Right down the street. Yeah, you said, right down the house,
right down the house, right right down the street from us,
near your favorite brewery.

Speaker 2 (35:47):
So yeah, so that's what would happen there, and anyone
entering that sterile zone would undergo these IDF security screenings.

Speaker 1 (35:56):
Okay, Well, the UN and other internetion well aid organizations
has said that they won't take part in a plan
like that, right. They cited violations of their core principles.

Speaker 2 (36:09):
Yeah, exactly. The UN's Humanitarian Office basically accused Israel of
wanting to use part or wanting to use control over
aid as a pressure tactic in all part of this
military strategy.

Speaker 1 (36:22):
I you know what it feels like.

Speaker 2 (36:24):
Yeah, it's the most of the international community, It does
feel that way. Yeah, And those in the international communities
and other aid groups are deeply opposed to using armed
personnel for aid distribution.

Speaker 1 (36:35):
Now.

Speaker 2 (36:35):
Hamas, for its part, called what Israel is doing an
extension of a starvation policy.

Speaker 1 (36:42):
Hamas her people are starting to talk crap against you
now too, So they don't try to act like you, Hazor,
try act like they got a moral high ground anyways,
So it's still an extremely grim picture. So why is
this deadline because remember the whole reason why always started

(37:04):
this whole thing is the deadline for the for the
release of hostages and everything. It's tied to Trump's visit,
which is supposed to be today and to the sixteenth yep.
Is he playing an active role in trying to broker
a deal?

Speaker 2 (37:21):
You know, that's a great question, and not really because
of what I've been talking about, these reports that indicate
that his relationship with NYA, who has been strained since
he retook office. He's he's done that trip to Saudi
Arabia and cutter, he's gotten a plane out of it,
and that is apparently more focused on bilateral issues and investments,

(37:43):
not on Gaza. Now some officials are saying nothing good
is gonna come of Trump visiting Israel right now, and
so with that, I do believe I read either today
or yesterday that Trump is going to bypass Israel and
meet with Benjamin Netanyahu.

Speaker 1 (38:02):
Uh huh has Netanyah he said anything about that yet?

Speaker 2 (38:05):
Or no, I didn't see what Netanyahu has said.

Speaker 1 (38:09):
I mean, because the optics all of the Obviously, I
would have looked better for Israel if Trump had come
to Israel and posed for.

Speaker 2 (38:16):
Pictures and you know, yeah, and.

Speaker 1 (38:19):
Then you could just float it like, oh, they fully
support everything.

Speaker 2 (38:22):
We do absolutely. And on the flip side of that,
the optics of Trump's visit to Israel would be very bad, right, right,
especially by Arab officials because of the escalating crisis that's
going on.

Speaker 1 (38:36):
Right and what is the sticking point in the actual
hostage negotiations, like why haven't they reached a deal to
avert this yet? I feel like this has been the
conversation for months and months now.

Speaker 2 (38:49):
Yeah, I mean it's the same fundamental disagreement that we've
seen for months and months. Israel wants a partial, shorter
term deal they won a forty five to sixty day
cease fire, and Hamas wants a comprehensive deal that ends
the war entirely, releases all Palestinians being held by Israel,
and removes Israel from Gaza completely. Now, Nenyahu has consistently

(39:11):
rejected any proposal that ends the war outright, and he
says that the only thing he wants to do is
dismantle Hamasa's capabilities. First, Okay, Now, the White House focus,
the Trump administration focus, according to some, has now even
more so shifted towards Russian Ukraine as well as relations
bilatter relations with Iran less so bandwidth for the war

(39:36):
in Gaza.

Speaker 1 (39:37):
I mean he still should have a say something about it.

Speaker 2 (39:41):
Yeah, well, I mean, you can't know how humans are.

Speaker 1 (39:44):
Can't just turn around and ignore what's going on over there.

Speaker 2 (39:47):
We only have a bandwidth for so much.

Speaker 1 (39:49):
Yeah, I guess so. Well, I don't know anyways, So
this massive Operation Gideon in Teriots is being presented as
the alternative if Hamas does not agree to times by
May sixteenth. So how is this playing out inside of Israel?
Surely there's opposition to such drastic move.

Speaker 2 (40:09):
Oh. Absolutely, Many Israeli officials see this as a quote
nuclear option end quote. They'd much prefer a deal right now. Now.
The decision here is highly controversial, even domestically, because you're
going to mobilize seventy thousand reservists, many of whom have
served for over three hundred days since October seventh. That's

(40:31):
a huge ask. We've been through that before. Right, You're
off to war three hundred and sixty five days. You
get another year off and then you're doing you know,
maybe one hundred and eighty more keep going. So those
feelings that we had leaving all the time and going
through that, the Israelis are feeling that movie stop loss,
stop loss. Yes, so they're out digging fox holes and

(40:57):
it does. It takes a mental toll, yeah, on not
just the people that are battling, but the families as well.
Now there's also concern within the IDF that thirty to
fifty percent of reservists might not even show up when
they're asked to. Oh gosh, and we've seen I've even
seen some calls on social media for soldiers not to

(41:18):
report for their duty when they get called.

Speaker 1 (41:21):
Like a protest. Yep, Okay, Well what about the hostage families.

Speaker 2 (41:26):
Yeah, they vehemently oppose this operation. They want their loved
ones back. That's all they care about. That's not all
they care about, but that's at the forefront of their
minds right now. Now, recent pollsh of sixty seven percent
of Israeli's oppose a major operation to occupy Gaza and
actually support a deal to end the war and free

(41:46):
the hostages. Now majority in those same polls think net
Yahoo is continuing the war only for political reasons.

Speaker 1 (41:55):
Well, it sounds like an incredibly high stakes gamble. Then,
I mean, using the threat of this devastating operation to
pressure Hamas while facing significant domestic and international opposition sounds
like untenable. Yeah, sure, And with President Trump in the region,

(42:16):
it adds yet another layer of complexity.

Speaker 2 (42:19):
Yeah, the definition of a highest take scamble. I would say. Now,
the idea of deployment prior to this potential launch is
framed as providing that quote window of opportunity end quote
for a deal, so putting more pressure on Hamas to
get the deal done, so Gideon's cher it doesn't have
to be carried out. And a lot of people are

(42:40):
calling this the wit Cough framework quote wit Coough framework
in quote. Don't know if you know wit Coff. He's
the envoy, he's been talking to Russia. Steve. Oh, Steve, Steve, yep,
Uncle Steve. Don't you know. Now, Israel has made it

(43:00):
clear that even if a deal is reached, they intend
to retain any territory cleared and add that to its
security zone. Not good when you're trying to get a
deal in place, and they've said if no deal happens,
there's a stark warning. Operation Gideon's Chariots will begin with

(43:20):
great intensity and it's not going to stop until all
its objectives are achieved. That includes those plans for voluntary immigration.

Speaker 1 (43:29):
And is this as all of this is happening, tensions
are obviously high elsewhere as well. I saw a brief
mention of Israeli strikes on Hohothy rebels and Yemen after
a missile hit in Israeli airport.

Speaker 2 (43:44):
Yeah, they hit the airport, the international airport in Sanna,
an airport I've been in probably hasn't been improved since
I've been in it, and I don't know that the
missile made it any worse than it already was. But
that's personal opinionated things that I will say. Look, the
Middle East is a tinderbox. It's been for a while.

(44:06):
But the immediate focus, the immediate deadline that I'm looking
at that I'm watching, is that Gaza ultimatum. That's why
I wanted to get this out and talk about this today,
that this week, that this comes out and leading up
to and during President Trump's visit, this is going to
be absolutely critical.

Speaker 1 (44:26):
When you say visit, you don't mean like is he
still going to Israel?

Speaker 2 (44:29):
No, I think he So he's been in Saudi Arabia, Cutter,
the United Arab Emirates. He's going to go into Syria,
skipping bypassing.

Speaker 1 (44:39):
Okay, well I thought earlier you said he was going
into Israel.

Speaker 2 (44:43):
So I was trying to say he's bypassing Israel. And
the optics of that looks very big.

Speaker 1 (44:49):
I'm saying. Earlier when we started talking, oh like you
said it like it was happening, because you were like,
it's happening this week, in a few days time, and
I'm like, it's the thirteenth right now, what are you
talking about?

Speaker 2 (44:59):
The Middle least trip, So the trip to Saudi Arapia
and the trip to Cutter, the trip to the Uate,
all of that.

Speaker 1 (45:05):
Yeah, all right, so obviously critical and potentially tragic. So
thank you Kurvin for breaking all of that down. It
was a lot and it's obviously a lot to process.
We will continue tracking this war, but for now, let's
shift our focus to this situation between India and Pakistan.

(45:27):
But before we dive in, we need to take a
quick break for a message from our sponsors, So please
stay with us. We'll be right back, Welcome back, listeners.
As we said before the break, we are shifting to
the situation between India and Pakistan. Before the weekend, it
looked like the world was on the brink of witnessing
yet another major regional war, but it was going to

(45:49):
be between two nuclear powers. Then, without much of any warning,
President Trump announced on social media his favorite thing in
the world, that India and Pakistan had reached a quote
full and immediate ceasefire end quote after what he described
as a quote long night of talks end quote, mediated
by the US Secretary of State Rubio. Rubio later confirmed

(46:13):
this mentioning engagement with both Prime Ministers Mody and Sharief
and even suggesting future broader talks at a neutral site.
That sounds like a huge step back from the brink.
I mean, was there any indication that this kind of
diplomatic push was underway.

Speaker 2 (46:31):
I honestly no, not publicly.

Speaker 1 (46:33):
Kind of yead that they kind of kept it under wraps.

Speaker 2 (46:36):
They did. But now it's all the talk and there's.

Speaker 1 (46:40):
He did dies, we did it, We did it, Joe.

Speaker 2 (46:43):
Yeah, so we all knew, well we when I say
we am talking about you know, the perpetually online who
were always looking at this stuff. There were the indications
that the international community was concerned. But the wrecked involvement
of the US at this level leading to an immediate
ceasefire that is pretty noteworthy. Marco Rubio even commended both

(47:09):
prime ministers. He's he commended them for their quote wisdom,
prudence and statesmanship end quote. Now, Pakistan's foreign minister also
confirmed the ceasefire on local news and he credited the US,
along with Saudi Arabia and Turkey for the facilitation efforts.

Speaker 1 (47:26):
That's a w for the American Yeah government.

Speaker 2 (47:30):
Wow, and take the winds.

Speaker 1 (47:33):
Take the winds, take the Winston LEAs said earlier, whenever
you were talking about the fact that Trump was actually
putting pressure on Russia, I was like, what, hell, let's
do it now? You remember we and the fact that
he's starting to push back against Ntan Yahoo, It's like this, yes, And.

Speaker 2 (47:50):
The concern was before, you know, during the Biden administration,
before all of this is what happens if China mediates
all of this stuff, right, and China is now seen
as the peacemaker, and then they are invited to the
table for all of these these things. But now I
just saw a poll out recently just today that among
the international community, if what was it, fifty four percent

(48:16):
of the international community believes that the US will do
good for the world. That's down from over sixty sixty
eight percent, and that China fifty eight percent of the
international community considers that China would do something good. Right, No,
but it's overlapping, it can overlap, right, do you do

(48:39):
you think the same people who think that the US
could do some good could also think that China do
some good. But that's up from thirty eight percent last year.
And so that was always a concern, what would China
do with this increased notoriety becoming the new superpower, the
new global power.

Speaker 1 (48:57):
But also Trump's not doing everything that everybody expected him
to exactly. It's a surprise. It is not a bad surprise.
So after days of escalating military action, including missile and
during strikes, it seems like cooler heads.

Speaker 2 (49:15):
Have finally prevable, something we always ask for on this podcast.

Speaker 1 (49:19):
Yeah. So the relief in Pakistan, according to reports, is palpable.

Speaker 2 (49:24):
Yeah. Absolutely, I think the relief around the world is palpable. Look,
I saw reports of celebrations in Pakistan, people expressing relief
after such a tense night of retaliatory strikes. Now, there
was one quote that stood out. This was from a
civil engineer in Islamabad, and he thanked the United States

(49:45):
for their efforts and he expressed a desire for friendship
between Pakistan and the United States. And even Afghan refugees
who are now in Pakistan. They've already fled one conflict zone,
one conflict zone, they're now in another one. They have
voiced their own relief because of this de escalation, in
this quick de escalation.

Speaker 1 (50:06):
Yet, Pakistan did launch retaliatory strikes before the ceasefire, didn't
they like the report mentions them hitting Indian military installations.

Speaker 2 (50:15):
Yes, so, just before the ceasefire was announced, Pakistan confirmed
launching retaliatory strikes, claiming to have destroyed several Indian military
installations that includes a runway at a key air base
there in India. Now, their military spokesman described it as
a quote brief but brilliant end quote response that sent
a strong message to India. Now, this action likely played

(50:38):
a role in bringing both sides to the negotiating table,
though demonstrated that Pakistan was willing and able to respond
to India's earlier strikes.

Speaker 1 (50:47):
India, for ittz Bart had also accused Pakistan of initiating
the escalation with their own strikes targeting air bases and
other infrastructure. It was very dangerous back and forth.

Speaker 2 (50:59):
Yeah, so everybody was concerned about both sides were claiming
to be retaliating for the other's actions. That's a classic
definition of an escalating conflict spiral. Now, India claimed it
strikes targeted Pakistan's technical infrastructure, their command centers, radar sites,
also weapons storage areas using their air launched precision weapons,

(51:22):
and then Pakistan in turn accused India of targeting air bases. Now,
the heavy exchange of fire along the line of control
leading into the weekend was I think what got everyone
very worried.

Speaker 1 (51:36):
So, with this ceasefire in place, does this mean the
immediate crisis is over? Like, can we breathe a sliver
relief or should we kind of hold out for.

Speaker 2 (51:46):
That baited breath, theaited breath. I think the ceasefire is
a positive and crucial step. I do think the situation
still remains fragile. Like I said, just after hours after
the agreement was announced, we had explosions and blackouts in
Indian controlled Kashmir. The one prominent Kashmir politician even questioned

(52:09):
the validity of the sea spire on social media because
he could hear air defense activity in the area that
he was at. What do you mean the one prominent
I'm to say a prominent not not one prominence like.

Speaker 1 (52:22):
You said, the one prominent politician.

Speaker 2 (52:25):
It's Omar Abdult. He's the prominent Kazmir politician.

Speaker 1 (52:30):
Okay, okay, sorry, So obviously it's incredibly concerning. So even
as the diplomats are shaking hands and kind of patting
each other on the back for de escalating this, there
are already potential violations on the ground.

Speaker 2 (52:45):
Yeah, and this tends to happen every single time. We're
a few days removed from it. The sea spire is remaining.
But this happens even in the age of instant in
the age of instant communication, this happens. And it's especially
true when you have something like this that was so
hush hush. They kept it quiet all weekend that the

(53:07):
discussions we were going on, or that they were ongoing,
and appears not everyone got the word in a timely fashion.
I think both sides started accusing each other of violating
the ceasefire. It's not so much a violation, it's just
I didn't get the word right. So the Indian Foreign
secretary emissary, he stated that Pakistan had performed repeated violations

(53:32):
just because of a border intrusion that happened. Now, Pakistan's
Foreign ministry blamed Indian forces for initiating the violation, but
both sides reaffirmed their commitment to the agreement, and they
urged communication at appropriate levels to resolve any of these issues.

Speaker 1 (53:49):
Yes, urge communication at appropriate levels. Well, I mean, it
sounds like the distrust and animosity are so deeply ingrained
that even a US procrecies fire is going to be tested,
you know.

Speaker 2 (54:02):
Yeah, And that's the unfortunate reality of humans being humans,
of humans of decades long conflict of millennial I know. Tribes, right, Tribes.
We're all put into our little tribes. And you you
can't like the other tribe because they're your enemy, because
they're not in your tribe. Yeah, you're just supposed to

(54:23):
like your tribe. Now, while this ceasefire might halt the
immediate military confrontation and then prevent further loss of life,
it doesn't address the root causes of the tension. Hopefully, though,
this ceasefire provides an opportunity for sustained dialogue and a
move towards a more lasting peace. But it's going to

(54:43):
take a lot of effort and goodwill from both sides and.

Speaker 1 (54:46):
The US role and all this. Trump's announcement on social
media is certainly very Trumpian, you know, something that could
be viewed as unconventional diplomacy. But I'm sure it's going
to become more prevalent every years go on, Like everybody's
on social media, so yeah, you know it's gonna happen.
He also mentioned increasing trade with both nations and said

(55:06):
during the talks that it like trade wasn't even discussed, right,
but it could happen. You know, we could all get
together and we could we could trade.

Speaker 2 (55:14):
Trump.

Speaker 1 (55:15):
Yeah, very trump So that's an interesting addendum.

Speaker 2 (55:19):
It's unconventional certainly. Now. What I think this really shows
is US interest in de escalating conflicts. What I mean
there is that's what he That's what Trump ran on,
I'm going to be the president of less wars and
not more wars, and he's kind of showing that right now.

(55:40):
He wants peace everywhere, no matter who it affects.

Speaker 1 (55:42):
Right, how dare he want peace?

Speaker 2 (55:46):
Well, when I say, no, matter who it affects, it's
give land to Russia. And as long as you stop
the war, if land to Israel, as long as you
stop the.

Speaker 1 (55:54):
War, somebody has to make concessions. Just ended.

Speaker 2 (55:57):
Yeah, I don't care who it is. You have to
do it now. The trade comment, like you said, very
very Trump, it could be a genuine attempt to incentivize
peace through economic ties, or it could be once again,
a more transactional view of this whole situation in the war.

(56:21):
And what do you got from me? Do you got
another air force one? You can give me? What else
can I get? And as we all know, only time
is going to tell what comes of all of that.

Speaker 1 (56:31):
So the key takeaway is that while the ceasefire is
a welcome development and a testament to the potential for
de escalation through diplomacy, especially with this administration, the situation
is still incredibly delicate because we're not out of the
wood yet.

Speaker 2 (56:48):
No, we're not. You're exactly right. The ceasefire buys time,
but it's really crucial that both India and Pakistan seize
that opportunity to engage in meaningful dialogue. They have to
address the fundamental issues that continue to fuel this dangerous
border rivalry. The international community, particularly the United States, parties

(57:13):
like Saudi Arabia and Turkey, they need to continue to
play a constructive role in facilitating that process for the
sake of regional stability and global security. This fragile ceasefire,
this fragile piece, I think needs to.

Speaker 1 (57:27):
Hold definitely keeping our fingers crossed here. It really brings
home just how quickly things can shift in the absolutely
vital role diplomacy plays when these critical situations unfold. Now
turning our attention to our final topic today, Europe is
looking particularly beautiful dynamic.

Speaker 2 (57:47):
Oh wouldn't you agree.

Speaker 1 (57:49):
I mean, we've seen some surprising election results and political
maneuvering that has certainly gotten us to talk yes week.
All right, so let's head to eastern Europe to start
specifically Romania. So what is the buzz coming out of there?
It sounds like the political ground is shifting.

Speaker 2 (58:07):
It really is. So. On May fourth, we saw George Simon,
he's the leader of the far right au R party.
He won the first round of their presidential election with
a significant forty point nine six percent almost forty one
percent of the vote. He's heading to a runoff on
May eighteenth against the reformist candidate. That candidate got twenty

(58:29):
one percent of the vote.

Speaker 1 (58:30):
Hold on, didn't we actually touch on those Romanian elections
like a while back, like a seem you would call
a candidate who was subsequently detained exactly.

Speaker 2 (58:41):
Yeah, So for those who don't remember, you're just starting
to listen to us now, this May election happen because
the results of a November twenty twenty four first round,
those initially won by another far right candidate Callan Georgescu,
they were annulled, and a reason for that annulment. Annulment

(59:01):
was what they called likely Russian interference.

Speaker 1 (59:05):
Likely Russian interference. We hear that term a lot, so
for our listeners, and honestly, even for me, that can
feel a bit vague, kind of like a catch all
excuse to justify what they're doing, you know, their political maneuver.

Speaker 2 (59:22):
I'm glad you said that because to some people, especially
just on the right, Yeah, they see that all the time,
you know, Russian Russian interference, Russian interference, and they consider
it a term to use in order to arrest a candidate.
You don't even have.

Speaker 1 (59:38):
Proof, you just throw it out there and you know, okay,
So I mean you've seen this stuff up close in
different theaters. So what does that actually look like in
a situation like Romania's.

Speaker 2 (59:53):
Look, in this case, it was actually pretty blatant. Now,
Romanian intelligence actually declassified the document, outlining it so they
could show the proof.

Speaker 1 (01:00:02):
I kind of like that.

Speaker 2 (01:00:03):
Yep, transparency, be transparent as long as it it doesn't
affect security, affect national security. And you know how I
feel about always calling for national it's national security, it's
national security. No saying that it's the same thing as.

Speaker 1 (01:00:18):
Saying Russian interference for everything. Using national security is an
excuse to hide things the same.

Speaker 2 (01:00:24):
And not show a satellite image that has been you know,
cleaned what we would call cleaned, meaning you don't see
where the satellite's location was, what it's looking at. You're
only seeing the image, and you can see that what
you said is what happened. This is just one, one
part one example. I think you can do that. It
takes time and effort and some money, obviously, but you

(01:00:49):
can do it, and it's for good reasons. And I
think that's why Romania did this because there was a
lot of people who were saying, you're just saying Russian
interference because you're trying to get your way.

Speaker 1 (01:01:01):
Well, governments aren't able to get away with just doing whatever.

Speaker 2 (01:01:04):
They want now, not on the stage.

Speaker 1 (01:01:07):
There's so much information available at everybody's fingertips. You have
to answer for.

Speaker 2 (01:01:13):
Your actions absolutely, and in this case, or you.

Speaker 1 (01:01:17):
Should have to the thing you have to because people don't.

Speaker 2 (01:01:22):
But I'm glad we'll always happened. Yeah, but we should
hold our elected leaders accountable. If you voted for a person,
you especially should hold that person accountable to what you wanted,
not just praising everything that they do just because you
voted for them.

Speaker 1 (01:01:39):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:01:40):
And that goes on all sides. So if you're thinking
of a particular candidate, you're right, Yeah, I tell you,
you're right. We're talking should everybody hold them accountable. In
this particular case, we're talking about a large scale TikTok campaign. Now,
TikTok itself admitted in March that it removed over twenty

(01:02:00):
seven thousand fake accounts promoting the au R Party. Then
there were cyber attacks that was by a pro Russian
hacker group. They even bragged about it on telegram. They
did a d DOOS account or a direct denial of service.
Oh what, it's a denial of service?

Speaker 1 (01:02:18):
Didn't okay? Sorry, it just sounded like one big word.
All the words blended together, so I needed you to
repeat that with that second d Okay.

Speaker 2 (01:02:27):
So the DOS account attack on actual Romanian government sites.
They were actually attacking other candidates during the May fourth vote,
this this go round, and they were explicitly saying these
Russian tell the Russian hackers that they were doing it
because Simeon is seen as an ally of Putin. Now,

(01:02:52):
this is classic hybrid warfare. You destabilize, influence and create chaos.
It's a playbook that we have definitely seen Russia, China,
North Korea deploy and refined for many years.

Speaker 1 (01:03:05):
I mean, it's all becoming clearer why they had to
hold another election right now. Use the other guy was not.

Speaker 2 (01:03:14):
Yeah, I mean that. So in the November election, it
was all based around TikTok. There were some inconsistencies with
what he was doing on TikTok. And you're as campaign finance,
you're not supposed to take in or spend certain amount
of money on certain things. And they were doing everything

(01:03:36):
in their power to do sketchy things. Okay.

Speaker 1 (01:03:39):
Well, so despite all of that, Simeon won the first round.
So what are his actual policies, because from what I've read,
it's a bit of a mixed bag, especially concerning Russia
and Ukraine.

Speaker 2 (01:03:54):
That's putting it mildly. Sianna. On one hand, like he's
called for a halt to Romanian to Ukraine and has
made territorial claims on parts of Ukraine and Moldova.

Speaker 1 (01:04:05):
So he wants to annex parts of it.

Speaker 2 (01:04:08):
He does not want to annex the parts He's fine
with Russia annex.

Speaker 1 (01:04:13):
Oh, so he's okay. I thought he was gonna say that,
you know, Romania is gonna take these.

Speaker 2 (01:04:20):
And maybe at some point he might do that.

Speaker 1 (01:04:25):
We don't know. We don't talking about. We don't know
what I'm talking about.

Speaker 2 (01:04:28):
Now. That aligns obviously with the Kremlin narratives. But he's
actually banned from entering both Ukraine and Moldova because of
his anti Ukrainian activities, so he can't even get in
there to do anything. Now here's the twist. With all that,
he also expressed this support for Romania's continued participation in

(01:04:49):
a US led NATO as a deterrent against Russia. That's
where I say it could be future territorial grabs if
he can get Russia out of the picture here.

Speaker 1 (01:05:02):
To do that? No, right, the dreams he's got, bigg.

Speaker 2 (01:05:07):
What does President Trump say, don't start a war with
the country ten times bigger than your military. You know,
that's what he said to Zelenski wow, falsely claimed Ukraine
had started the right he forgot. Yeah. Look, this guy
even supports sanctions against Russia and is called Putin's Russia
a major threat on the international scale.

Speaker 1 (01:05:31):
So he's just playing both sides of that fence, pro
NATO anti Russia in one breath, but echoing Kremlin lines
about wanting to cut off Ukraine in the next. And
didn't he say something about the other far right guy.

Speaker 2 (01:05:47):
Georgi Escu, Yeah he did. He still supports Kalender Jesku.
Now that guy is overtly pro Russian. He's also anti
NATO in I said, has even said that this is
Simeon talking. He'd consider George Escu for prime mister if

(01:06:07):
he wins. You know, it's a complex and frankly concerning
picture going on in Romania right now.

Speaker 1 (01:06:14):
So how does this play out with the government in Bucharest.
Is it stable enough to navigate this, especially with that
May eighteenth runoff looming.

Speaker 2 (01:06:24):
Yeah, Look, the current ruling coalition in Romania appears to
be fracturing. They're not the only European country that looks
like they are fracturing. The Prime Minister of Romania actually
announced his resignation. That happened on May fifth, That was
right after their candidate failed to even make the runoff.

(01:06:44):
So their significant domestic political turmoil happening. It's making it
unclear who could form a government or how a figure
like a Georgie Escu could ever get parliamentary approval. And look,
this directly impacts Romania's cruci support for Ukraine. They provided
Patriot system and they've also hosted F sixteen pilots for

(01:07:06):
training that all could be at risk.

Speaker 1 (01:07:09):
Well, that is definitely another situation that we will be
watching closely. We have been reporting on their elections since
last year. Yeah, let's shift west just a little bit
because speaking of wobbly starts and the need for stability
in Europe, Germany gave us quite the political drama this week, too,
didn't it.

Speaker 2 (01:07:29):
Yeah, it really did. So everyone had just expected that
Fredrik Merse, the Conservative leader. We all thought he would
just sail into the chancellorship after his party won the
federal election back in February, they signed a coalition deal
with the center left SPD. We thought everything was in

(01:07:49):
the books.

Speaker 1 (01:07:50):
But it wasn't quite that smooth, was it? Because humans
are involved?

Speaker 2 (01:07:55):
Yeah, you could tell from my inflection, right, Not that?
Not that easy?

Speaker 1 (01:08:01):
Yeah, So walk us through what happened with that vote?

Speaker 2 (01:08:04):
Right? So in the first parliamentary vote on Tuesday, Merz
needed three hundred and sixteen votes in the six hundred
and thirty seat Bundestag. Now he only got three hundred ten,
and this was a massive blow. It's unprecedented in modern
German history for a candidate to fail like that on
the first attempt when your coalition already has the numbers.

(01:08:26):
He already had the three hundred and sixteen votes within
his coalition, he only got three hundred ten votes. That
meant at least eighteen from his own coalition decided not
to back him.

Speaker 1 (01:08:42):
Well, that is that is a rough start. So how
does a leader and a coalition recover from that public
descent on day one, especially when Europe is looking to
Germany for strong leadership on so many fronts.

Speaker 2 (01:08:54):
Yeah, us two, we need a strong Germany. We need
a strong Germany, y'all. Yeah, we knew Petty's strong, Like
it's this is well. Explain that later that vote was
a strategic or not strategic. It was a significant challenge.
It was a humiliation. It would be as if Donald

(01:09:17):
Trump was when Donald Trump was elected, he had eighteen
Republicans vote against the election and put Kamala Harris in office.
That's how humiliating it is. In that first dren whenever
he thought he had it in the bag. Yeah, because
I mean, right, So we have an electoral college electoral votes,

(01:09:40):
so those voters from each state put they actually put
in their votes for president. Right, it's not us the
people who we're voting, and then our people represent us
to go vote. So there is a chance that if
someone is popular among the people but not within the
government in the United States, they would not get elected

(01:10:01):
because those people would change their votes. Right. It'd be
politically devastating, it be political suicide, right, But it could happen.
It's what Donald Trump tried to do in twenty twenty
or in twenty twenty one, whenever he asked for them
not to confirm the votes for Biden. I mean, no
one did it, because it's political suicide. That's what happened here. Now,

(01:10:27):
he did manage to win in the second vote that
happened on that same day. He got three hundred and
twenty five votes after that, so fifteen more people voted
and then change their mind, and they changed their mind.

Speaker 1 (01:10:40):
Do you think there was some like.

Speaker 2 (01:10:44):
Grand standing, maybe.

Speaker 1 (01:10:45):
Not necessarily grandstanding, but like promises like if you vote
for me.

Speaker 2 (01:10:50):
I'll give you oh after the fact, yeah, absolutely. I
think the first the first round of voting, you had
some people who were not really in favor of Frederick
Murrz and some of the things he wanted to do.
And then after the fact his coalition went around and
most likely gave promises to them to their constituents and yeah,

(01:11:13):
prob yeah. Now, even though he got all the votes,
the damage there on the credibility really of the government
was done. And some analysts are pointing to a heightened
mistrust between these coalition partners that are they coalesced around now.
Some are saying that the hope for Germany to reassert

(01:11:34):
itself as an anchor of stability has been dashed because
of this initial failure. Now Murrz himself has brushed it off.
He's saying he just wants to get to work. He
doesn't care about the vote. He wants mutual trust from
all the people of Germany.

Speaker 1 (01:11:49):
So who were these dissenters and why throw such a
wrenge in the works?

Speaker 2 (01:11:54):
Right at the beginning, there was some speculation that it
was disgruntled SPD members, but more recent analysis suggests some
of the dissent came from his own conservative block. They
were apparently unhappy with his u turn on fiscal policy
and specifically loosening borrowing limits. This is after campaigning on

(01:12:16):
fiscal rectitude, one of the pillars of their conservatism. Now,
as is often the case, when mainstream parties stumble, pollsters
start to say that the you know, someone from one
of the far right or far left, and in this case,
they're saying that the far right the AfD is likely
the only real winners in this whole debacle, as they

(01:12:38):
erodes trust in established institutions.

Speaker 1 (01:12:42):
So, now that Chancellor Mertz is officially in office, what
are the big items on his agenda? Germany is a
powerhouse so its stability and direction matter immensely.

Speaker 2 (01:12:55):
Yel like, he's facing a packed agenda right now. Got
to agree owned security guarantees for Ukraine. That's a big one.
Navigating trade issues with the US with those tariffs, the
Trump tariffs, plus the ongoing economic adjustments after losing cheap
Russian gas because of the sanctions. He's also got to

(01:13:16):
manage the growing rivalry with China now. Domestically, his coalition
wants to revive growth, They want to support Ukraine. They
also want to increase their own military spending. So Mertz
already scheduled his first trip to France. He's also scheduled
a trip to Poland, and he's got a call in
the works with US President Trump. His cabinet choices right now,

(01:13:39):
what I have viewed, they reflect a desire for renewal.
He's trying to bring in new faces, trying to get
people with private sector experience. This is something President Trump
has been doing right, private sector experience. Elon Musk, defense contractors,
those kind of things. Reality shows, Yeah, reality show. I

(01:14:00):
was I was half listening, I guess and you said
reality shows and I was waiting for like in you
know reality shows US that blah blah blah, and I
meant reality show, you meant reality shows. Yep. Now he
did keep Boris Pastorious as the Defense minister. That is

(01:14:21):
a smart move because they are going to need some
continuity there an.

Speaker 1 (01:14:26):
Attempt to signal a fresh start with the cabinet then,
but that shaky first vote will kind of cast a shadow.
It really feels like a lot of European capitals are
watching Berlin very closely.

Speaker 2 (01:14:38):
No doubt we are too, so.

Speaker 1 (01:14:40):
Kurvin pulling these two situations together, Romania in Germany, what's
the big picture here from your perspective, looking at it
with your analyst hat on and also through the lens
of your service, like, what should our listeners be taking
away from all this? We are seeing these significant political
shifts and instability in two key Europeans countries, But looking

(01:15:02):
beyond what we've specifically discussed today, what are the broader
trends or flash points we should all be watching? And
why does an election in Romania or a chancellor vote
in Germany actually matter to someone listening in say, Ohio
or California. I mean, it can feel very distant to
some like it feels like it doesn't necessarily affect them.

Speaker 2 (01:15:25):
Yeah, and it's you asking a very critical question. That's
because nothing happens in a vacuum anymore. These aren't just
isolated European stories. Their data points in a much larger
global pattern. So what we should be watching for is
how these individual national narratives, the rise of specific parties,

(01:15:46):
the success or failure of certain leaders, feed into broader
geopolitical shifts. Think about it. An election result anywhere can
alter international alliances, can reshape trade agreements, trump tariffs, that
impacts global security postures, and it even influences energy markets.
So whether it's in Europe, it's in South America, Asia, Africa, Ohio,

(01:16:11):
these votes all have a ripple effect that absolutely reaches
the United States or wherever you're listening from. It affects
your economy, foreign policy, even the security partnerships that each
country relies on. But all that brings me to another
crucial point I want to talk about. We need to
be laser focused on the increasing effectiveness of Russia's gray

(01:16:34):
zone warfare. We talked about the overt stuff in Romania,
the TikTok campaigns, the DOOS attacks. The real insidious success
of these tactics is how pervasively. These narratives can spread,
and they're often laundered through multiple sources, and so they're
picked up in amplified, sometimes unwittingly, by voices within our
own countries. Right now, we're seeing high level podcasters, high

(01:16:58):
level commentators, influencers in the US, Canada, the UK, there
were regurgitating talking points that originated as carefully crafted Krimlin disinformation.
The goal isn't always to make you believe a specific lie.
The goal sometimes is to just muddy the waters so
much that people lose faith in any information makes them

(01:17:20):
more susceptible to simplistic, often divisive narrative. And it's about
eroding trust in democratic institutions, that's full stop.

Speaker 1 (01:17:29):
There. That is a chilling thought that the conversation itself
can be weaponized so effectively. So if these groups, often
fueled by the external interference or writing, waves of discontent,
are gaining traction, how should democratic governments respond? Because the
instinct for some might be to just shut them all down.

Speaker 2 (01:17:51):
Yeah, and that's often exactly the wrong instinct, I think
so from my experiment experience, not experiments, I haven't experimented
with this. Governments do themselves no favors trying to arrest
leaders or dismantle political groups purely through force or legal suppression,
especially if those groups are operating within the balance of

(01:18:12):
the law. Now we might consider it distasteful and that
they're rhetoric is not what we like. But the approach
that these governments are taken are taking often backfire, plays
into the narrative of persecution. It can create martyrs, and
it drives these movements underground where they become even harder

(01:18:32):
to understand encounter. Instead, what I think is desperately needed
is for democratic governments and institutions to get much much
better at fighting on the information battlefield. They need to
ramp up their own strategic messaging, not just reactively, but
proactively find an authentic, compelling voice, or honestly many voices

(01:18:54):
to champion the values of freedom, transparency, and genuine democratic participation.
It's about clearly and consistently articulating what you stand for,
not just what you're against. It's not about suppressing misinformation,
it's about inoculating the public against disinformation by investing in

(01:19:14):
critical thinking. We need to raise the mantle of freedom
with conviction demonstrate its benefits, rather than just try to
stamp out the voices of those who seek to undermine it.
I say that because, honestly, when you see folks resorting
to name calling, you know, dismissing someone because they're a
basement dweller, you know, or whatever insult comes to mind,

(01:19:35):
instead of actually dissecting their arguments with facts and logic,
it doesn't do any good. It just derails any chance
of productive dialogue and frankly makes it harder for anyone
to understand what's really at stake here.

Speaker 1 (01:19:48):
Battle of ideas. I think that is a powerful and
much more nuanced approach than what we often see discussed
on social media, which is, like you said, all the
name calling. Yeah, a lot to keep an eye on,
and a lot to consider about how we all engage
with this information and disinformation. Yeah, a lot of moving
pieces and a lot of uncertainty. So thank you. Anything

(01:20:12):
else you want to.

Speaker 2 (01:20:13):
Discuss now, I'm good. Do you have anything you want
to talk about?

Speaker 1 (01:20:16):
I just want to apologize for us being absent pretty
much for the last two weeks. Yes, we have a
lot going on over here behind the scenes, and a
very small window of time in which we can accomplish it,
Like a very small window of time, and so we
kind of had to reprioritize just just for now.

Speaker 2 (01:20:39):
While we get just as the last few weeks.

Speaker 1 (01:20:41):
Yeah, just these lots of few weeks, and we are
going to start releasing the podcast on Mondays. Also, our
sound might be a little off for a little while
while we figure out our new setup and.

Speaker 2 (01:20:58):
Situation.

Speaker 1 (01:20:59):
Yeah, our situation. Yeah, So please be patient with us
while we figure that out again, because I know you
guys are getting used to the crispy voices.

Speaker 2 (01:21:08):
Yes, you like this, and you like us talking over
each other, I'm sure yeah at some points. Yeah, yeah,
it's it's gonna be great, and we're we are continuing
the podcast. That's what I want everyone to know. Some
people know what's going on behind the scenes who are
listening right now, and I've assured everyone to include Mike

(01:21:31):
Leon from Leon Media Network. We are continuing the podcast, right.

Speaker 1 (01:21:36):
We like did gibber jabber too much?

Speaker 2 (01:21:38):
Yes, And we like talking to each other. We like
talking to each other about I don't know if we
like talking about these events, but I think talking about
them brings everything into perspective and so one of us
can spiral and not just one. It's not oh, only

(01:21:59):
Curve Inspirals or only Tiana. Now we can both spiral
at certain moments and the other one comes in and
kind of brings some clarity to the situation.

Speaker 1 (01:22:08):
Brings us back to the topic.

Speaker 2 (01:22:10):
It hands, yes, and you hear it on this podcast,
and that's what we love. And I love hearing how
much you guys love it whenever we go on the
tangent and then one of us brings it back and
tries to get us back on topic. So that's not
going away either.

Speaker 1 (01:22:25):
Yeah, we will definitely be clearer about what's going on
over here once everything gets settled. It's just a lot.

Speaker 2 (01:22:33):
It's been a whole lot.

Speaker 1 (01:22:35):
All at once. Very like I said, very small window
of time to accomplish what we need to get done.
And we couldn't record the last couple of weeks.

Speaker 2 (01:22:44):
And Mother's Day, So happy Mother's Day to while the
mother's listening and it's a little late.

Speaker 1 (01:22:49):
Yeah that's okay. Yeah, Happy Mother's Day to all the mothers.

Speaker 2 (01:22:54):
We did celebrate Tiana.

Speaker 1 (01:22:58):
So yeah, it was very sweet. I really it was
a really sweet day. I liked it a lot. I
had a choice whether or not we were going to
go out or not and I was like, I'm not going.

Speaker 2 (01:23:08):
Yeah exactly.

Speaker 1 (01:23:11):
Her schedule is packed. Yeah, it's been packed.

Speaker 2 (01:23:14):
For let's read your exact words. Our schedule is packed enough.
Why would I go somewhere.

Speaker 1 (01:23:19):
I don't want to go anywhere. I just want to
sit down. And you know, he made me ribs.

Speaker 2 (01:23:24):
It was a great chill day. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:23:26):
But more importantly, he made me ribs, seeing his favorite
him not a cook, but he is good at making ribs.
He has perfected those. And ugh, yes, chef's kiss as
someone who is very proficient in the kitchens. I love
your ribs. So yeah, and I think.

Speaker 2 (01:23:48):
That's all we have. That's all the time we have.

Speaker 1 (01:23:51):
That's all we have. Thank you for being patient with
us while we figured all this this new trajectory out. Yes,
thank you so much for listening to this week explained.
We hope that you found it both informative and engaging.
If you have any feedback or suggestions for future episodes,
we'd love to hear from you. For more in depth

(01:24:12):
coverage of these stories and more, be sure to follow
us on social media at This.

Speaker 2 (01:24:16):
Week explained Tiana. Honestly, thank you so much. Until next week,
Stay safe out there,

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Crime Junkie

Cardiac Cowboys

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Is Global Order Shifting? Ukraine, ME, Asia, Europe

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Crime Junkie

Cardiac Cowboys

All Episodes

Is Global Order Shifting? Ukraine, ME, Asia, Europe

On Purpose with Jay Shetty